This weekend’s Honolulu Star-Advertiser Hawaii poll brought a raft of surprising findings. Appointed Democratic Sen. Brian Schatz is trailing Democratic Rep. Colleen Hanabusa in their closely-watched primary matchup, and Democratic Gov. Neil Abercrombie, who appointed Schatz to the Senate and was succeeded in the House by Hanabusa, is losing to his likely GOP rival.
Just because the results are surprising doesn’t mean this poll isn’t accurate. But it does serve as a reminder that pollsters face unique challenges in Hawaii.
Polling in Hawaii is notoriously tricky. The Aloha State’s complex ethnic melting pot makes finding the right sample composition difficult — especially important when a Caucasian candidate like Schatz or Abercrombie is facing an American of Japanese ancestry (AJA) candidate like Hanabusa or Ige. Ward Research, the Star-Advertiser‘s pollster, missed the Democratic primary in the state’s 2nd congressional district last cycle by a wide margin.
Schatz’s campaign and other Democrats disputed the poll, which showed Hanabusa ahead, 48 percent to 40 percent. For the primary matchups, Democrats aligned with Schatz’s campaign pointed out that 82 percent of all the registered voters surveyed participated in that question, even though far fewer than 82 percent of eligible registered voters are likely to cast ballots in the primary.
Even though Schatz is the incumbent, including unlikely voters would benefit Hanabusa, they argued. As a twice-elected representative for half the state’s residents, Hanabusa has higher name identification than Schatz. As a result, lower-information voters — whom the Schatz camp says are unlikely to vote but are being surveyed in the Star-Advertiser poll — would be more likely to support Hanabusa.
The Schatz campaign did provide some support for their theory: They released a month-old internal poll showing Schatz with a slim, four-point lead over Hanabusa. But, like the Star-Advertiser poll, they found Hanabusa with more name-ID, and Schatz did markedly better among voters who were familiar with both candidates.
In the gubernatorial race, Democrats feel that the poll, which shows Abercrombie trailing former Lt. Gov. James “Duke” Aiona, the man he clobbered four years ago, by eight points, is equally flawed. But even internal polling is no easy task in Hawaii: In addition to the mix of ethnicities that make up the electorate, the state and other outside groups have done little work to maintain records of voters there that can be mined for information about vote frequency and other characteristics that help pollsters determine whom to call.
“The voter file is terrible. It’s in terrible shape,” said one Democratic pollster with experience in Hawaii. “Nobody’s really spent the money to make it good. So that’s a problem.”
With the prospect of tight Senate and gubernatorial races, Hawaii remains a state to watch in 2014. But there’s reason to view the poll results we see there with a critical eye, and surveys are likely to be infrequent enough to make poll averages less useful.
What We're Following See More »
Before we get to the specifics of this exposé about escorts working the Iowa and New Hampshire primary crowds, let’s get three things out of the way: 1.) It’s from Cosmopolitan; 2.) most of the women quoted use fake (if colorful) names; and 3.) again, it’s from Cosmopolitan. That said, here’s what we learned:
- Business was booming: one escort who says she typically gets two inquiries a weekend got 15 requests in the pre-primary weekend.
- Their primary season clientele is a bit older than normal—”40s through mid-60s, compared with mostly twentysomething regulars” and “they’ve clearly done this before.”
- They seemed more nervous than other clients, because “the stakes are higher when you’re working for a possible future president” but “all practiced impeccable manners.”
- One escort “typically enjoy[s] the company of Democrats more, just because I feel like our views line up a lot more.”
No matter where you stand on mandating companies to include a backdoor in encryption technologies, it doesn’t make sense to allow that decision to be made on a state level. “The problem with state-level legislation of this nature is that it manages to be both wildly impractical and entirely unenforceable,” writes Brian Barrett at Wired. There is a solution to this problem. “California Congressman Ted Lieu has introduced the ‘Ensuring National Constitutional Rights for Your Private Telecommunications Act of 2016,’ which we’ll call ENCRYPT. It’s a short, straightforward bill with a simple aim: to preempt states from attempting to implement their own anti-encryption policies at a state level.”
Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”
The New Covenant. The Third Way. The Democratic Leadership Council style. Call it what you will, but whatever centrist triangulation Bill Clinton embraced in 1992, Hillary Clinton wants no part of it in 2016. Writing for Bloomberg, Sasha Issenberg and Margaret Talev explore how Hillary’s campaign has “diverged pointedly” from what made Bill so successful: “For Hillary to survive, Clintonism had to die.” Bill’s positions in 1992—from capital punishment to free trade—“represented a carefully calibrated diversion from the liberal orthodoxy of the previous decade.” But in New Hampshire, Hillary “worked to juggle nostalgia for past Clinton primary campaigns in the state with the fact that the Bill of 1992 or the Hillary of 2008 would likely be a marginal figure within today’s Democratic politics.”
At first, “it was pleasant” to see Trevor Noah “smiling away and deeply dimpling in the Stewart seat, the seat that had lately grown gray hairs,” writes The Atlantic‘s James Parker in assessing the new host of the once-indispensable Daily Show. But where Jon Stewart was a heavyweight, Noah is “a very able lightweight, [who] needs time too. But he won’t get any. As a culture, we’re not about to nurture this talent, to give it room to grow. Our patience was exhausted long ago, by some other guy. We’re going to pass judgment and move on. There’s a reason Simon Cowell is so rich. Impress us today or get thee hence. So it comes to this: It’s now or never, Trevor.”